Nancy Grace proves Steven Avery is innocent

I am not a fan of Nancy Grace. So when I heard that she was devoting an entire show to the Steven Avery case with the teaser that she was going to show the evidence the documentary left out, I thought I would watch with an open mind. Maybe there is important evidence that might help sway me one way or the other. What I got instead was another Nancy tirade where she gets her facts wrong and makes unsupported claims about evidence.

According to Nancy Grace, Netflix and the filmmakers were working for the defense and only showed one side of the story. If anyone showed only one side of the story, it was Nancy Grace. She continually made the claim that the film was done by a couple of film students. Considering that the film took ten years to make, it seems highly unlikely that they were film students for all of those ten years. So what was the evidence that was left out? She talked about Steven using *67 when calling to ask for Teresa Halbach. She said that Steven once answered the door in his robe. Those are interesting details, but they don’t sway me one way or the other. Nancy showed pictures of the police holding hand cuffs and ankle restraints. That is pretty damning evidence, especially if you were to believe the prosecutor’s original theory that Teresa was restrained on the bed in Steven’s trailer and raped and tortured. But there is no evidence to support that. Now if Teresa’s DNA was found on those handcuffs and restraints, he’s guilty. End of story. But I have not heard that. So now we know that Steven may be into bondage. The ankle restraints appeared to have a furry lining. I guess Steven wanted his torture victims to be comfortable.

Nancy brought up the fact that Steven’s DNA was found under the hood of Teresa’s vehicle. I don’t have enough information on that evidence to speak with any authority. But if you believe that evidence was planted, and I do, then that evidence is not persuasive. Next Nancy begins to lay out the prosecution case. The vehicle was found on the salvage lot. She did show the video of Steven asking about the rumor he had heard about a cop placing it there. I’ll give her that one. Next she talks about Teresa’s key that was found in Steven’s trailer with Steven’s DNA on it. What she failed to mention was that Teresa’s DNA was not found on the key. How does that happen? She talks about the blood in Teresa’s vehicle. She talks about the defense claim that the blood came from a vial of blood. But she doesn’t mention that Steven’s fingerprints were not found anywhere on or in the vehicle. She also doesn’t show the evidence room footage that shows that someone had tampered with that evidence. Next Nancy talks with disdain about how Teresa’s bones were found in a fire pit. What she fails to mention is that there were three different burn locations. I believe the defense theory that Teresa’s body was most likely burned in the large drum and then the bones were then poured onto the burn pit. The person who did that, however, did not get all of the bones out of the drum. Nancy does put on the footage of Steven’s girlfriend Jodi talking about phone records that show she called and talked with Steven when the crime was supposed to have been committed and made a second call later that evening, but she doesn’t play the audio recording of those two calls. You can’t listen to those recordings and envision any scenario that Steven was involved in a brutal crime and then talked so calmly to his girlfriend.

Lastly Nancy comes to the defense of fellow prosecutor Ken Kratz. She doesn’t mention the sexting scandal. She doesn’t mention anything about how Ken Kratz prosecuted two people on the same crime but told the jurors in each trial two different stories about how it happened. She doesn’t say anything about how Ken Kratz put an innocent sixteen-year-old in prison for forty years over a coerced confession.

Brendan Massey is innocent. Anyone with any common sense can see that. When Brendan’s fourteen-year-old cousin recanted her statements implicating Brendan, that should have been enough for Ken Kratz to drop all charges. When no evidence was found that backed up Brendan’s confession, that should have been enough. When Brendan got on the stand and told jurors that he made it all up, that should have been enough. When it was revealed that Brendan’s own public defender coerced another confession, that should have been enough. When Brendan’s mother denied police claims that she elected to not be present for Brendan’s interrogation, that should have made Ken Kratz think twice. If he simply watched the four-plus hours of Brendan trying to give the detectives what they wanted so he can go home to watch Wrestle Mania, that should have been enough for Ken Kratz to reverse course and save one child’s future. So no, Nancy, I have no sympathy for Ken Kratz.

As for Steven, if I had been on the jury, I would have voted not guilty because I have reasonable doubt. Steven doesn’t act guilty. He spends every minute of every day going over his case looking for something that might free him. Would a guilty person do that? Nancy Grace does not have the best track record in pinning guilt on anyone.

The documentary series Making a Murderer is one of the best documentaries I have seen. It shows how unjust are justice system is. When Brendan asks that he be assigned a new public defender, the judge asks Brendan why he wants a new lawyer. “He thinks I’m guilty,” Brendan replies. “I’m innocent.”  “Well, I don’t see any conflict,” the judge says while at the same time realizing that his automatic response makes no sense. “I’m going to deny your motion.” Here’s an idea, the judge, lawyers, and appeal judges who upheld this travesty should all be disbarred and sent packing.

Update

So Nancy has another show dedicated to the Steven Avery Case. This time she has shocking new details that proves Steven and Brendan’s guilt. So what is the shocking new evidence. Well, she puts on Brendan’s coerced confession. She shows Brendan on the witness stand being drilled by the assistant prosecutor. You know the one where he’s asking Brendan about what book talks about a woman being raped and tortured. If all you saw was Nancy’s show and her edited highlights, you would be just as disgusted as Nancy appears to be. But Nancy doesn’t show Brendan mentioning the book Kiss The Girls. She doesn’t show the cousin on the stand admitting that she made up the whole thing. She doesn’t show the police feeding Brendan the story he finally strings together. In the past, those who gave false confessions never had a chance because only the part Nancy showed would have been all they saw. This is different. Watch the video trying to get Brendan to admit that Teresa was shot in the head. “Something happened to her head, Brendan,” the police ask Brendan. “What happened? Tell us.” “He cut her hair,” Brendan replies, trying to come up with something to satisfy the police. Maybe Nancy still thinks the Central Park Five confessions are valid. Or how about the Memphis Three? Maybe Nancy should watch the Frontline special Confessions. Maybe then she’ll understand how false confessions happen. And by the way, there is not a single shred of evidence that supports Brendan’s confession. No blood evidence. No murder weapon. No DNA in the trailer where this all happened.

As for Jodi’s turn around. She’s obviously ticked off from that letter Steven sent her. How come Nancy didn’t play the audio of that fifteen minute phone call? The phone call that occurred at the very time Steven and Brendan were supposed to be raping and torturing Teresa? The phone call where Jodi is telling Steven how she expects him to be romantic when she gets out? Doesn’t sound like she’s talking to a monster then.

Update 2

I just saw all of part two of this docuseries. Read more here: Review-of-making-a-murderer-part-two